Although defence counsel cited Vorvis v. I.C.B.C. (1989), 1989 CanLII 93 (SCC), 36 B.C.L.R. (2d) 273 (S.C.C.) in support of his contention that the plaintiff was only entitled to reasonable notice, he did not cite any authorities to indicate what length of notice the court should fix. On the other hand, plaintiff's counsel relied on the length of the employment term set out in the Agreement, arguing that the plaintiff was entitled to notice based on the balance of the term remaining in the agreement, eight months, and seeking damages for the difference in the plaintiff's earnings between July 2000 and March 2001.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.